Director liable for Company pursuing hopeless Counterclaim. Rimer J. held that where companies had irresponsibly pursued a hopeless counterclaim on the instructions and for the benefit of a controlling director, that director was made liable, jointly and severally with the companies, to pay the costs of the proceedings on the indemnity basis. It was an exceptional case in which the director was in substance the, or at least a, real party to the proceedings from start to finish.
|
Legal Aid- Private Client Test. The Claimant applied to judicially review the decision by the Funding Review Committee of the Legal Services Commission to uphold the discharge of his legal aid certificate. The decision was quashed on the basis that the Committee had failed to provide adequate reasons as to how it had concluded that the substantial costs already incurred in the proceedings would not have justified a private client being advised to proceed, or how that conclusion fitted into its ...
|
Legal Aid- Private Client Test. The Claimant applied to judicially review the decision by the Funding Review Committee of the Legal Services Commission to uphold the discharge of his legal aid certificate. The decision was quashed on the basis that the Committee had failed to provide adequate reasons as to how it had concluded that the substantial costs already incurred in the proceedings would not have justified a private client being advised to proceed, or how that conclusion fitted into its p ...
|
Costs of Application for Pre-Action Disclosure. Held that in the circumstances it had been wrong to order the respondent to an application for pre-accident disclosure to pay the applicant’s costs. The judge had failed to have sufficient regard to CPR 48.1 which lays down the general rule that the respondent to an application for pre-action disclosure would be awarded his costs. He did not appear to have fully appreciated its significance or considered what kind of conduct would justify the cou ...
|
Costs of PI action where Claimant found to be Dishonest. At a hearing for the assessment of costs a claimant who, at a previous hearing, had been found to have dishonestly exaggerated several aspects of her claim, was found liable for 90% of the defendant’s costs in respect of the period when the defendant was not protected by a Part 36 offer, subject to a set-off of £5,000. CPR 44.3 requires the conduct of the claimant to be taken into account; this conduct easily brought the claimant within t ...
|
Enforceability of Conditional Fee Agreement. A conditional fee agreement was unenforceable where it had various deficiencies that were significant enough to prevent substantial compliance with the Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000. The agreement in question had not been drawn up by a lawyer. The question for the Court was whether any departures from the Regulations or a requirement under s.58 of the 1990 Act had a materially adverse effect on the protection of the client or on the pr ...
|
Amendment of Graduated Fee Legislation. In a case concerning the amount due to a barrister in graduated fees, the Lord Chancellor amended the governing regulations, the Criminal Defence Service (Funding) Order 2001 to reflect the true intention of the draftsman.
|
Agreement between Claimant and Solicitor. An agreement between the Claimant and his solicitor concerning the amount of fees payable, which fees were ultimately to be paid by the Defendant under a costs order, had not amounted to a void contingency agreement, and on its proper interpretation, the agreement had not released the Claimant from any further liability to pay costs to the solicitor. The mere fact that the Claimant had agreed that he would not bring an action for his outstanding costs ...
|
Court’s Discretion under CPR r.44. The Court could not use CPR r.44 to circumvent the mandatory provisions of CPR r.45 in order to award to a claimant who had failed, at trial, to better a Part 36 offer or payment, a success fee no greater than that to which he would have been entitled under r.45.16 had the offer been accepted. It was held that r.44 and r.45 have to be read together; the Court could neither directly award a different success fee nor award the Claimant a proportion of his costs ...
|
Consequences of failure to comply with pre-action protocol. A judge had misdirected himself as to the applicability of the general rule on costs and had been wrong to reduce the recovery of costs by the successful party to nil for failure to engage in negotiations in accordance with a pre-action protocol. The Court exercised the judge’s discretion afresh, taking guidance from his view as to the way he would have treated the Claimant as the successful party without the Defendant’s willingness t ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |